I Blame the Dutch (mpoetess) wrote,
I Blame the Dutch
mpoetess

  • Mood:

Er?

Wanda (of E! Online) interviewed Marti Noxon on the 20th, when I was conveniently out of town so no one had to hear me bitching. The bit that confuses me isn't spoilery at all:

kari from Minneapolis: "Dead Things" was great, but I'm shocked that Buffy never apologized for abusing Spike. Why?

Marti: I think the nature of their relationship was violent in turns. He'd do a bad thing, she'd do another bad thing...So nobody owes anyone big apologies.

Er? Ok, personal opinion, the fact that two people treated each other equally like crap doesn't mean no apologies are owed - it means equally big apologies are owed, unless they both consciously waive the need for such. But anyway.

What confuses me is-- this is Marti saying this, right? Bad boyfriend, there's no coming back from this, etc etc, Marti? Does she *realize* that comment logically extends to Seeing Red unless she says something to qualify why it shouldn't? Which she hasn't?

I'm not dancing around going "See, Marti's excused him, he doesn't have to apologize, and if he did, it would be something he *could* apologize for, because Marti said so... neener neener. This must mean Spike wasn't over the line, and anybody who sympathized with him is vindicated." Far from it. Mutual apologies are owed, and his is the bigger one by far - but Buffy doesn't get out of admitting that she behaved wrongly, just because he dealt the last and dirtiest blow.

I'm just... I can't tell whether Marti's backtracking because of the fan support for Spike, whether she's trying to sweep any thought of responsibility on Buffy's part (for the relationship, not the assault) out the window...

I just think, what an odd statement to make, after all the furore. I don't understand what she intends by it.
Subscribe
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

  • 14 comments